the tavern about his views
of Feuerbach and Lotze, I should undoubtedly have stopped him with
Goethe's "Ergo bibamus."

There was one person in Gottingen, however, Herbert Pernice, from whom I
might expect full sympathy. Though only five years my senior, he was
already enrolled among the teachers of the legal faculty. The vigour and
keenness of his intellect and the extent of his knowledge were as amazing
as his corpulence.

One evening I had met him at the Krone and left the table at which he
presided in a very enthusiastic state of mind; for while emptying I know
not how many bottles of Rhine wine he directed the conversation
apparently unconsciously.

Each of his statements seemed to strike the nail on the head.

The next day, to my great delight, I met him again at Professor Baum's.
He had retreated from the ladies, whom he always avoided, and as we were
alone in the room I soon succeeded in turning the conversation upon
Feuerbach, for I fairly longed to have another person's opinion of him.
Besides, I was certain of hearing the philosopher criticised by the
conservative antimaterialistic Pernice in an original manner--that is, if
he knew him at all. True, I might have spared myself the doubt; for into
what domain of humanistic knowledge had not this highly talented man
entered!

Feuerbach was thoroughly familiar to him, but he condemned his philosophy
with pitiless severity, and opposed with keen wit and sharp dialectics
his reasons for denying the immortality of the soul, inveighing
especially against the phrase and idea "philosophy of religion" as an
absurdity which genuine philosophy ought not to permit because it dealt
only with thought, while religion concerned faith, whose seat is not in
the head, the sacred fount of all philosophy, but the heart, the warm
abode of religion and faith. Then he advised me to read Bacon, study
Kant, Plato, and the other ancient philosophers--Lotze, too, if I
desired--and when I had them all by heart, take up the lesser lights, and
even then be in no hurry to read Feuerbach and his wild theology.

I met and conversed with him again whenever I could, and he availed
himself of the confidence he inspired to arouse my enthusiasm for the
study of jurisprudence. So I am indebted to Pernice for many benefits. In
one respect only my reverence for him entailed a certain peril.

He knew what I was doing, but instead of warning me of the danger which
threatened me from toiling at n